Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: TheBoy on 10 December 2006, 22:46:45
-
I need a P4 processor.
Easy task I hear you ask?
Only I need a LGA775 socketed one. Still easy?
Only it can't have EMT64...
Anyone know where I can get one? Or anyone got a working one lying around?
-
You do like your obscure bits of kit don't you Jaime! :-?
-
Carefull with thread titles or you will get me and Vectrolosys answering ;D
-
Carefull with thread titles or you will get me and Vectrolosys answering ;D
LOL, its a nickname I used for a mate of mine - if there were 2 competing technologies, I would wait to see what he bought, then I would buy the other, as he always backed the wrong horse ;D
Trouble is, it seems to be me now.... >:(
-
Main reason I never bought a P4. Too many socket revisions.
I stuck with Socket A.
Second main reason was that they are pretty rubbish ;D
-
Main reason I never bought a P4. Too many socket revisions.
I stuck with Socket A.
Second main reason was that they are pretty rubbish ;D
I think you'll find AMD are far worse for socket revisions, although they did stick with Skt A for ages (arguably too long, which hurt their performance).
As to performance, no AMD Socket A chip has ever outperformed the equilivent Intel part in real world tests - though the Athlon does have stunning integer performance.
In 32bit arena, Intel has always been top dog (look at major manufacturers 32 bit workstaion and server offerings, always Intel). 64bit is harder to call, as most 64 bit server/workstations (the only sectors currently needing 64bit) tend to stick to non x86 chips such as SPARC and Itanium. There aren't many 64bit apps (true 64bit) for x86 chips, and OS wise you're looking at W2k3 or a handful of Linux versions, and Sun appear to have the 64bit Unix sewn up with SPARC/Solaris combination, HP being a close 2nd with Itanium/HP-UX. That makes Windows Server 2003 and Windows Longhorn Server the deciding factor on whether x86 64bit will be a success, rather than marketing bull.
-
Main reason I never bought a P4. Too many socket revisions.
I stuck with Socket A.
Second main reason was that they are pretty rubbish ;D
I think you'll find AMD are far worse for socket revisions, although they did stick with Skt A for ages (arguably too long, which hurt their performance).
As to performance, no AMD Socket A chip has ever outperformed the equilivent Intel part in real world tests - though the Athlon does have stunning integer performance.
In 32bit arena, Intel has always been top dog (look at major manufacturers 32 bit workstaion and server offerings, always Intel). 64bit is harder to call, as most 64 bit server/workstations (the only sectors currently needing 64bit) tend to stick to non x86 chips such as SPARC and Itanium. There aren't many 64bit apps (true 64bit) for x86 chips, and OS wise you're looking at W2k3 or a handful of Linux versions, and Sun appear to have the 64bit Unix sewn up with SPARC/Solaris combination, HP being a close 2nd with Itanium/HP-UX. That makes Windows Server 2003 and Windows Longhorn Server the deciding factor on whether x86 64bit will be a success, rather than marketing bull.
I c u r v gud w/ IT spk :P ::)
-
Main reason I never bought a P4. Too many socket revisions.
I stuck with Socket A.
Second main reason was that they are pretty rubbish ;D
I think you'll find AMD are far worse for socket revisions, although they did stick with Skt A for ages (arguably too long, which hurt their performance).
As to performance, no AMD Socket A chip has ever outperformed the equilivent Intel part in real world tests - though the Athlon does have stunning integer performance.
In 32bit arena, Intel has always been top dog (look at major manufacturers 32 bit workstaion and server offerings, always Intel). 64bit is harder to call, as most 64 bit server/workstations (the only sectors currently needing 64bit) tend to stick to non x86 chips such as SPARC and Itanium. There aren't many 64bit apps (true 64bit) for x86 chips, and OS wise you're looking at W2k3 or a handful of Linux versions, and Sun appear to have the 64bit Unix sewn up with SPARC/Solaris combination, HP being a close 2nd with Itanium/HP-UX. That makes Windows Server 2003 and Windows Longhorn Server the deciding factor on whether x86 64bit will be a success, rather than marketing bull.
I c u r v gud w/ IT spk :P ::)
For those who cant work text jargon like me (above) - I see you are very good with IT Speak
Sorry had to translate as I could'nt understand it the first time I read it :-[
;D
-
I take that as an insult >:( - seeing as many people in IT just talk 'dangle berries'. And play Wank Word Bingo all day >:( >:(
-
I take that as an insult >:( - seeing as many people in IT just talk 'dangle berries'. And play Wank Word Bingo all day >:( >:(
What insulting TheBoy :question my convertion :question
-
Real-world performance wise, the P4 probably did hold the slight advantage. With the power hungry core they used, I'd be shocked if it didn't! The P4's power consumtion and running temperature was pretty shocking. In comparison, AMD had a neat thing going with the Skt A CPU's. Comparably low power consumtion and a much lower operating temperature with almost on-par performance (excelling in various areas). The Athlon was a great gaming CPU, which was why I stuck with it.
-
I take that as an insult >:( - seeing as many people in IT just talk 'dangle berries'. And play Wank Word Bingo all day >:( >:(
Sorry TB, but it had 2 b done after a diatribe like that. We don't want you suffering Stockholm syndrome being with IT knobs all day. ;) :D
-
Real-world performance wise, the P4 probably did hold the slight advantage. With the power hungry core they used, I'd be shocked if it didn't! The P4's power consumtion and running temperature was pretty shocking. In comparison, AMD had a neat thing going with the Skt A CPU's. Comparably low power consumtion and a much lower operating temperature with almost on-par performance (excelling in various areas). The Athlon was a great gaming CPU, which was why I stuck with it.
Skt A basically means Athlon XP - probably AMD's worse chip in recent times. Duron (also Skt A) was a good budget chip though. Athlon XP was hot and power hungry (my own leccy bill reduced significantly when my Athlon XP 2000+ server was replaced with a P4 2.4Ghz one from same era (it was my old desktop), and the heat in that room also dropped. Typical of Athlon XP.
P4 got into heating issues with early 3Ghz and with early Prescotts, but soon fixed this with P4E range (original Prescotts were P4D). Athlon XP never matched P4 in real world.
For a brief time, Athlon64 did outperform standard P4 (not Extreme) when Intel had to scrap 4Ghz. 'Core' range processors undoubtedly the current desktop chip to have. Yet to see one of those Core Quads running yet....
-
Athlon was AMD's worse chip in recent times?? It's what bought them back into the market!!
I have always found the P4 chips to be the hot and power hungry ones, which has been shown in all the benchmarks I've seen comparing the two and real life experience (I used to go to a lot of LAN parties - or geek parties if you like).
My 3200+ for example runs at 2.2Ghz and 39 degrees idle to 42 degrees on load, with standard cooling. Will have to fetch the power consumption specs when I'm home.
-
Kinell........am I the only computer illiterate soul that doesn't understand a damn word of this computer jargonated thread?? :-[ :-? ;D
-
Haha, sorry for the non-tech guys, would try and keep it jargon free, but thats quite impossible.
-
Athlon was AMD's worse chip in recent times?? It's what bought them back into the market!!
I have always found the P4 chips to be the hot and power hungry ones, which has been shown in all the benchmarks I've seen comparing the two and real life experience (I used to go to a lot of LAN parties - or geek parties if you like).
My 3200+ for example runs at 2.2Ghz and 39 degrees idle to 42 degrees on load, with standard cooling. Will have to fetch the power consumption specs when I'm home.
Athlon, not a bad chip. Almost a match for same clock speed PIII
Athlon XP is a poor chip (the way its marketed). Its true clock speed (ie 1.5Ghz for 2000+) is around the P4 it would match. But trying to sell it as a 2Ghz chip (and hence equal to a P4 2.0Ghz) was riduculous. AMD did manage to calm down the power/heat requirements with later chips (as did Intel)
Duron, good chip for budget. One of the reasons AMD had to scrap lower speed Athlon XP's prematurely was that Duron equalled performance...
-
The 2.8Ghz in the W2k3 server that hosts the Redhat VM that runs this place is currently 37C. Chassis temp is around 32C (the DLT unit generates a lot of heat, heating up chassis). Hasn't been powered off for years, and has to run (currently) 4 VMs as well as all the SQL/Exchange and other rubbish that runs on it....
-
I don't understand what all these benchmarks ive seen have based their information on, if what you're saying is true.
And no... they weren't from an AMD source :P
The P4's performance was only marginally better in most that I saw on Tom's Hardware and a few other reliable sources.
-
I don't understand what all these benchmarks ive seen have based their information on, if what you're saying is true.
And no... they weren't from an AMD source :P
The P4's performance was only marginally better in most that I saw on Tom's Hardware and a few other reliable sources.
Most of the common benchmarking tools (such as Sisoft) traditionally didn't put too much empathsis on floating point and SIMD type instructions. The Athlon is impressive on integer (hence why their marketing can try passing off a 3000+ as a P4 3Ghz equivilent), which drags the otherwise lagging processor up.
Architecturaly, the P4's Netburst was good, but hit a wall approaching 4Ghz due to its complexity - hence the lean Core range now. Such complex processors have had their day, and tbh, x86 (inheritently CISC, though both AMD and Intel have been running RISC and an x86 micro emulator for years) AMD need to go through this same radical rethink, else they are going same way (assuming they could get clock speed up in the first place). I also think that AMD may have become distracted with its merger with ATI...
But the proof in true performance at any given time, look what Workstation and Server vendors are providing for their mid/top class x86 systems - invariably Intel.
-
Slightly off topic, but have you seen the performance and ultra low power requirements of the new SPARC chips - very impressive. I reckon this will help reboost Sun's presence in data centres due to lower electrical requirements, and associated lower cooling requirements....
-
Slightly off topic, but have you seen the performance and ultra low power requirements of the new SPARC chips - very impressive. I reckon this will help reboost Sun's presence in data centres due to lower electrical requirements, and associated lower cooling requirements....
Well must say i like Intel chipsets.....btw dont if they still do.....but PC Worlds own brand used to use intel chipsets.....i bought on a few years ago on that basis......was the cheapest PC in the store.....just coz it had their own brand on it.....but intel inside....carnt be bad :y
Low electrical requirements ;D ......how does (when i worked for a computer manufacturer) you need a 3 phase power source 30amps/phase work now then ;D
Oh and if your computer room aircon carnt maintain 18C then this is over tolerance and your support contract costing you thousands per year is invalid ;D ......and we could tell.....as we could dial into the computer over ISDN (yes was a few years back) and check the air intake temp....and usually went along the lines off.....sorry but until you get the comp room temp down to 18C were are not going to come out and look at the comp that cost you hundreds of k's ;D
Oh and they were sparc based ......but as i said going back a few years....sparc 2's iirc
-
Slightly off topic, but have you seen the performance and ultra low power requirements of the new SPARC chips - very impressive. I reckon this will help reboost Sun's presence in data centres due to lower electrical requirements, and associated lower cooling requirements....
Well must say i like Intel chipsets.....btw dont if they still do.....but PC Worlds own brand used to use intel chipsets.....i bought on a few years ago on that basis......was the cheapest PC in the store.....just coz it had their own brand on it.....but intel inside....carnt be bad :y
Low electrical requirements ;D ......how does (when i worked for a computer manufacturer) you need a 3 phase power source 30amps/phase work now then ;D
Oh and if your computer room aircon carnt maintain 18C then this is over tolerance and your support contract costing you thousands per year is invalid ;D ......and we could tell.....as we could dial into the computer over ISDN (yes was a few years back) and check the air intake temp....and usually went along the lines off.....sorry but until you get the comp room temp down to 18C were are not going to come out and look at the comp that cost you hundreds of k's ;D
Oh and they were sparc based ......but as i said going back a few years....sparc 2's iirc
Thats the point with the new SPARCs, massively lower power requirements (hence heat) as previous generation of stuff. Sun may be on a winner, as its probably low enough to make it worth ripping out the x86 type blades and putting in small SPARC servers...
-
That explains a bit....
Yeah, I've seen the specs of those new SPARC's. They look pretty awesome. Datacentre bills will be a heck of a lot lower! Will just take time to deploy, since they cost money to invest in.
AMD are also doing well in the server market with their Opteron chips. I think the predominantly Intel thing is a lot to do with the fact companies like DELL, HP and the likes have contracts which will allow them to package Intel chips only. That has recently changed, since they obviously noticed a clear price difference in the two vendors with AMD being the cheaper (which could explain why they, as you say, aren't quite as quick as a pentium).
Also the new Core 2 Duo chips look pretty damn amazing for the desktop. They trounce the competition by far.
-
:o :o :o
Any chance of creating a Computer Geek section on the forum?? ::) :D ;D
-
:-X
-
That explains a bit....
Yeah, I've seen the specs of those new SPARC's. They look pretty awesome. Datacentre bills will be a heck of a lot lower! Will just take time to deploy, since they cost money to invest in.
AMD are also doing well in the server market with their Opteron chips. I think the predominantly Intel thing is a lot to do with the fact companies like DELL, HP and the likes have contracts which will allow them to package Intel chips only. That has recently changed, since they obviously noticed a clear price difference in the two vendors with AMD being the cheaper (which could explain why they, as you say, aren't quite as quick as a pentium).
Also the new Core 2 Duo chips look pretty damn amazing for the desktop. They trounce the competition by far.
Both Dell and HP have offered AMD Opeterons for a while (on servers). Neither company has had much success - the Xeons easily outperform them. AMD do not have a large market share in server sector, but do well in low cost hosting shops due to low costs...
-
3 Phase computers!! :o
That is totally insane! haha
-
3 Phase computers!! :o
That is totally insane! haha
Not uncommon for the older big buggers, less common now...
-
I take that as an insult >:( - seeing as many people in IT just talk 'dangle berries'. And play Wank Word Bingo all day >:( >:(
I work in I.T ya know hope u didn't mean me!!! ;) ;) ;) ;)
-
That explains a bit....
Yeah, I've seen the specs of those new SPARC's. They look pretty awesome. Datacentre bills will be a heck of a lot lower! Will just take time to deploy, since they cost money to invest in.
AMD are also doing well in the server market with their Opteron chips. I think the predominantly Intel thing is a lot to do with the fact companies like DELL, HP and the likes have contracts which will allow them to package Intel chips only. That has recently changed, since they obviously noticed a clear price difference in the two vendors with AMD being the cheaper (which could explain why they, as you say, aren't quite as quick as a pentium).
Also the new Core 2 Duo chips look pretty damn amazing for the desktop. They trounce the competition by far.
Both Dell and HP have offered AMD Opeterons for a while (on servers). Neither company has had much success - the Xeons easily outperform them. AMD do not have a large market share in server sector, but do well in low cost hosting shops due to low costs...
AMD are/soon releasing a quad core processor but they said it will be for servers to begin with
-
Little bit of info here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/26/amd_ruiz_revelations/
-
I take that as an insult >:( - seeing as many people in IT just talk 'dangle berries'. And play Wank Word Bingo all day >:( >:(
I work in I.T ya know hope u didn't mean me!!! ;) ;) ;) ;)
So you know exactly what I'm talking about... ...I am lucky, I work in a really good team of truely knowledgable guys, willing to help out when I get stuck.
-
3 Phase computers!! :o
That is totally insane! haha
Not uncommon for the older big buggers, less common now...
And how about a £1000/month leccy bill for the server room? !!
:o
-
3 Phase computers!! :o
That is totally insane! haha
Not uncommon for the older big buggers, less common now...
And how about a £1000/month leccy bill for the server room? !!
:o
We don't deal with little server rooms, consider tizzy bill for each data centre....
-
3 Phase computers!! :o
That is totally insane! haha
Not uncommon for the older big buggers, less common now...
And how about a £1000/month leccy bill for the server room? !!
:o
I was thinking that....that's a lot of juice to be using day in day out! :o
-
3 Phase computers!! :o
That is totally insane! haha
Not uncommon for the older big buggers, less common now...
And how about a £1000/month leccy bill for the server room? !!
:o
I was thinking that....that's a lot of juice to be using day in day out! :o
Probably half in running computers, other half in cooling......
-
Would something using that much power be fluid cooled to the outside atmosphere, or just a combination of fans and air con?
-
All mid range stuff (ie the standard web server) would not be liquid cooled. Don't know much about them, but some of the mainframe stuff is liquid cooled...
-
I take that as an insult >:( - seeing as many people in IT just talk 'dangle berries'. And play Wank Word Bingo all day >:( >:(
I work in I.T ya know hope u didn't mean me!!! ;) ;) ;) ;)
So you know exactly what I'm talking about... ...I am lucky, I work in a really good team of truely knowledgable guys, willing to help out when I get stuck.
I take that as they're not very helpful?
-
You must know the types of people I mean, really common in IT - people who talk a load of crap because they dont know shit, and often unwilling (unable) to help when you're stuck... ...fortunately my colleagues are really good/knowledgable/helpful :)
-
That explains a bit....
Yeah, I've seen the specs of those new SPARC's. They look pretty awesome. Datacentre bills will be a heck of a lot lower! Will just take time to deploy, since they cost money to invest in.
AMD are also doing well in the server market with their Opteron chips. I think the predominantly Intel thing is a lot to do with the fact companies like DELL, HP and the likes have contracts which will allow them to package Intel chips only. That has recently changed, since they obviously noticed a clear price difference in the two vendors with AMD being the cheaper (which could explain why they, as you say, aren't quite as quick as a pentium).
Also the new Core 2 Duo chips look pretty damn amazing for the desktop. They trounce the competition by far.
Both Dell and HP have offered AMD Opeterons for a while (on servers). Neither company has had much success - the Xeons easily outperform them. AMD do not have a large market share in server sector, but do well in low cost hosting shops due to low costs...
AMD are/soon releasing a quad core processor but they said it will be for servers to begin with
Intel already have a quad core CPU on sale...
http://www.ebuyer.com/product/119918/product_info/rb/23718558336
sexy! not so sexy price though.